Shipbucket

For a '39 ship you have a lots of AA.

_________________

Nobody expects the Imperial Inquisition!

I was thinking more about its reassigned role as carrier escort, I guess. Maybe I could do both an "as commissioned" (1939) and a "holy crap we need more small guns" (1942) version?

_________________
"Anybody remotely interesting is mad in some way." - The Seventh Doctor

Aye, that would be better. Number of AA indeed look more like 42- version.

_________________

Nobody expects the Imperial Inquisition!

hmmm ... a thought ... maybe have the ship delayed some in building, the navy putting the carrier conversions first as a priority, with the Sentinel commissioned in '41 or '42 with the increased AA and up-to-date radar? Since by the late 30's it was essentially a warship without a set role (or having been designed for a role which it is no longer suited for), that could be possible, perhaps?

_________________
"Anybody remotely interesting is mad in some way." - The Seventh Doctor

I like this idea...

Interesting mix of USN and RN styles . Re the AA, I don't recall seeing multiple 40mm mounts on the back of the main turrets, would that be feasible?

I believe most WW2 US BB's had them.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:USS_Missouri.JPG
http://shipbucket.com/images.php?dir=Re ... usetts.png
http://shipbucket.com/images.php?dir=Re ... 201944.png
http://shipbucket.com/images.php?dir=Re ... 201944.png

_________________
"Anybody remotely interesting is mad in some way." - The Seventh Doctor

Didn`t all of them have AA guns mounted on the turrets late war?

I believe you may be correct

_________________
"Anybody remotely interesting is mad in some way." - The Seventh Doctor

Sorry, I should have said the Mk, VI multiple mount, which, postwar, did appear on the Vanguard, but not on the rear of its 15-in turrets; the reason, I suspect, was that such a realtively complex and heavy mount would require below deck support; but you may want to verify this yourself